Anonymous posting is only appropriate when you are revealing sensitive employment related information about a firm, job, etc. You may anonymously respond on topic to these threads. Unacceptable uses include: harassing another user, joking around, testing the feature, or other things that are more appropriate in the lounge.

I accepted an offer for a job about a month ago, and it starts in about a month. However, I am being heavily encouraged to apply to this other job that just opened, which pays a lot more and I have a very good chance at getting the offer.

It feels weird to apply to this other job even though I accepted the first one. Even weirder: the offer for the new job would probably be given in about a month and a half, so I will already have started at the new job and worked there for 2 weeks by the time I would get the new offer (assuming, of course, that I would get it).

I know the conventional TLS advice is "fuck the employers- they would screw you over in a second, so you should only look out for yourself," but I'm hoping to hear from someone else who has been in a similarly delicate situation.

Well it's more complicated than that. The prospective job is with an employer for whom it is my ultimate goal to work, but the location and job aren't right. The current job is for a less desirable employer, but the location and position are much better. So the long term goal was to work for the current employer for a couple of years and hope to lateral to the prospective employer.

But then this opening appeared, and the people in charge of hiring have basically told me that it's mine if I want it. But they also said that if I apply to the job and then decide not to take it, I might be sort of blacklisted from getting a job there in the future- the higher-ups are very sensitive about hiring people who WANT to work there, and withdrawing an application or declining an offer is a huge red flag. Sounds ridiculous but I'm talking about state govt positions, where connections (and the politics of other people's egos) matter a lot.

Well it's more complicated than that. The prospective job is with an employer for whom it is my ultimate goal to work, but the location and job aren't right. The current job is for a less desirable employer, but the location and position are much better. So the long term goal was to work for the current employer for a couple of years and hope to lateral to the prospective employer.

But then this opening appeared, and the people in charge of hiring have basically told me that it's mine if I want it. But they also said that if I apply to the job and then decide not to take it, I might be sort of blacklisted from getting a job there in the future- the higher-ups are very sensitive about hiring people who WANT to work there, and withdrawing an application or declining an offer is a huge red flag. Sounds ridiculous but I'm talking about state govt positions, where connections (and the politics of other people's egos) matter a lot.

My opinion, with little/no experience or knowledge of non-private hiring, is to stick with the original plan and crank it out for a couple years first. I don't like the idea of burning bridges/relationships so I'm on the conservative side. It sounds like lateraling to this better opportunity would be a natural progression for you whereas trying to start at that employer immediately may be awkward for you right now. Take the "right job, right location" and put in your time first. Then lateral to the "great job, (hopefully) great location."

NYstate wrote:How likely is it that this job will be around in two years? My feeling is that it is better to go where you want to work and start building up your career there.

If you don't apply after being approached, will they blackball you anyway for not showing sufficient interest?

For the sake of simplicity and clarity I will refer to the employer from whom I have already accepted an offer as "State A," and the employer who wants me to apply for a job as "State B."

The State B job won't be around in two years, but the original plan was that I would put in work at State A for a few years in order to build up enough experience to lateral to the job I want at State B.

Re: your second question, State B knows that I have already accepted an offer from State A, so not applying won't shut the door because they understand that I've already made a commitment. (State B has actually already told me this).

That said, State B probably won't be as excited about me a few years down the line, because I won't be as present in their minds as a good candidate. So this might be a situation where if I don't seize the opportunity to work at State B right now, I might not get another shot. But that wouldn't be so bad because I would still be working at State A.

There are so many competing interests here:

State B job is REALLY far away, and moving isn't an option. So time spent with my spouse and children would suffer because I would spend almost 4 hours/day commuting

NYstate wrote:How likely is it that this job will be around in two years? My feeling is that it is better to go where you want to work and start building up your career there.

If you don't apply after being approached, will they blackball you anyway for not showing sufficient interest?

For the sake of simplicity and clarity I will refer to the employer from whom I have already accepted an offer as "State A," and the employer who wants me to apply for a job as "State B."

The State B job won't be around in two years, but the original plan was that I would put in work at State A for a few years in order to build up enough experience to lateral to the job I want at State B.

Re: your second question, State B knows that I have already accepted an offer from State A, so not applying won't shut the door because they understand that I've already made a commitment. (State B has actually already told me this).

That said, State B probably won't be as excited about me a few years down the line, because I won't be as present in their minds as a good candidate. So this might be a situation where if I don't seize the opportunity to work at State B right now, I might not get another shot. But that wouldn't be so bad because I would still be working at State A.

There are so many competing interests here:

State B job is REALLY far away, and moving isn't an option. So time spent with my spouse and children would suffer because I would spend almost 4 hours/day commuting

BUT

State B job salary is 30% more that State A job salary

BUT

I am more interested in the substantive work at State A

BUT

I eventually want a mid-level position at State B.

Sorry this situation is so complicated, and I appreciate the help!

Hard to tell which is better. If you will be happy with maybe not getting the job down the road in State B, then stick with State A.

Will you at least be building up mutual contacts in both states if you stay in state A?

NYstate wrote:Will you at least be building up mutual contacts in both states if you stay in state A?

No- weirdly enough I have lots of contacts right now with State B (because of years of interning and then volunteering), but none with State A (because they hired me despite total lack of contacts/connections in the state whatsoever).

So if I stick with State A I will obviously build up my State A contacts, but my State B contacts with probably atrophy. Even if I try my best to keep social connections going with State B folks, I will probably not be as high up on the hiring totem pole as I am now.

I am leaning towards just sticking with State A. That way I don't burn bridges, and who knows what the situation will look like 5 years down the road either way? I'll be missing out on lots of income by taking the lower paying job but I think the whole "bird in the hand" thing still makes the most sense in this situation.

Are both Sate A and State B jobs pretty secure (e.g., state government)? If that is the case, then I would stick it out with State A because family and spouse are very important to me and I wouldn't want to deal with a 4 hour commute, even if it's to a higher paying job. If you don't mind the commute and your family's okay with the long commute and shortened time together, then I would choose State B.

If State B is a stable state job (like you said it is) and State A is something like a small firm gig, then I would probably choose State B.

Congrats on the options. I hope it works out. I think this is a highly personal decision and you should probably speak with your family about it extensively (which you probably already have done).

Anonymous User wrote:Are both Sate A and State B jobs pretty secure (e.g., state government)? If that is the case, then I would stick it out with State A because family and spouse are very important to me and I wouldn't want to deal with a 4 hour commute, even if it's to a higher paying job. If you don't mind the commute and your family's okay with the long commute and shortened time together, then I would choose State B.

If State B is a stable state job (like you said it is) and State A is something like a small firm gig, then I would probably choose State B.

Congrats on the options. I hope it works out. I think this is a highly personal decision and you should probably speak with your family about it extensively (which you probably already have done).

I agree that a four hour commute is best avoided. The extra money may not be worth it.

Anonymous User wrote:Are both Sate A and State B jobs pretty secure (e.g., state government)? If that is the case, then I would stick it out with State A because family and spouse are very important to me and I wouldn't want to deal with a 4 hour commute, even if it's to a higher paying job. If you don't mind the commute and your family's okay with the long commute and shortened time together, then I would choose State B.

If State B is a stable state job (like you said it is) and State A is something like a small firm gig, then I would probably choose State B.

Congrats on the options. I hope it works out. I think this is a highly personal decision and you should probably speak with your family about it extensively (which you probably already have done).

Both are state jobs, and are secure insomuch as they're permanent positions with benefits and everything, but in this economy any state job around here can disappear in an instant. Both states' budgets are equally dismal/scary.

To be clear, the job in state B is 2 hours away, so I guess officially it's a 2 hour commute (which equals 4 hours per day).

Thanks for all of your help. I recognize that it's definitely a privilege to be in this position, and I appreciate your feedback.

One of my parents had to commute about an hour each way for their job, and that was brutal enough. 2 hours each way, assuming you're driving and not taking public transit, will be 10x worse. The commuting thing should be a huge factor.

If the 2 hour commute each way is via public transit, it's a little better since you can get work done, check your fantasy teams, etc.

If you go with state b, my feeling is that the 4 hours a day you're losing + your family will mean INFINITELY more to you than everything else (interest in the work, money) after you actually do it for like, 2 weeks.